(2) Although the initial outlay in closets and sewers is less than with the water-carriage system, there is the constantly recurring expense of removing the excreta, as well as of cleansing the pails, etc.
(3) In the dry-earth closets, the provision of dry earth or other material involves some expense.
(4) Whatever dry method be adopted, sewers are always required to carry off the foul water, as well as liquid trade products, and a certain proportion at least of the urine. It is impossible to supply sufficient dry earth to absorb all the urine and slops of the population.
Thus, as the Indian Army Sanitary Commission said, speaking of barracks, “to have two systems of cleansing stations—a foul-water system, and a dry-earth system—would simply be paying double where one payment would answer; or, if all the excreta, solid and liquid, are to be carried away, this must be done at a cost ten times greater than that which would be necessary, if all the excreta were removed by drains.”
With some of the dry methods, as where middens or cesspits are drained into the sewers, the sewer-water is more offensive than in towns supplied with water-closets. When a midden or cesspool is drained, the principle of conservation, which distinguishes the dry system from the wet, is practically abandoned; and not only so, but the solid matters still remain to be disposed of, by a tedious process.
(5) The dry systems, involving the retention of excreta about the house, poison the atmosphere. In all towns where the refuse matters are not removed immediately, there is a high mortality, especially among children.
On the other hand, the introduction of the water-carriage system into large towns, with the abolition of midden-heaps and cesspools, has been followed in nearly every case by a diminution in the death-rate, and especially a considerable diminution in that from such diseases as enteric fever. It has furthermore increased the comfort of life, and removed those serious nuisances which are inevitably associated with privies and pail closets, and to a less extent, when care is not exercised, with earth closets.
HOUSE REFUSE.
In an ordinary household the disposal of ashes from fires, of broken pots and cans, of waste-paper, and of vegetable and animal debris form a serious difficulty. The difficulty is one that can be minimised by the careful housekeeper. Old newspapers, etc., may be sold, though their value is very small; other waste-paper should be burnt. All vegetable and animal debris should be burnt. This may be effected without nuisance if coal-fires are in use, by placing potato-peelings, cabbage leaves and similar substances under the fire until thoroughly dried, and then burning them. The careful housewife will not waste bones, but utilise them for soup. After being boiled they are much less liable to putrefy in the dust-bin; but should even now be burnt in the fire. If this plan be pursued, the contents of the dust-bin will be simply ashes, broken pots and cans, and a few cinders—here again a sifter is desirable—and no nuisance can arise. It is only organic refuse that smells. If only gas or paraffin stoves are in use, as during the summer months, any possible nuisance in connection with the dust-bin is minimised by allowing all refuse to dry before it is placed in the dust-bin, or by wrapping all putrefiable substance inside several layers of newspaper.
In emptying the dust-bin or ash pit, care must be taken that the bottom is thoroughly scraped out. It is well to keep some quicklime (thoroughly dry) for sprinkling on the bottom and sides of the receptacle each time after it is emptied. This greatly helps in keeping it dry and diminishing nuisance during summer.